Was That Sausage Alive before You Stole it?

Auburn NY Daily American Monday Evening, January 3, 1859

 

A RICH DECISION.
In Pontiac, Mich., a short time since, a man was brought up before a Justice of the Peace for trial charged with stealing a dog. The defendant asked for a jury. The case was tried, the jury went out, and after an hour's deliberation returned with a verdict of  “Guilty of petty larceny, in the second degree." The Justice expressed his surprise at such a verdict, and stated that there was no law in Michigan, making the taking of a dog stealing. The jury, through their foreman, stated that the dog was not stolen as a dog, but after it had been made into sausages. The prisoner went up for the usual time on this decision.

PASSMORE WILLIAMSON vs. JUDGE LEWIS.
It will be recollected that Passmore Williamson, the Quaker, who was imprisoned by Judge Kane at Philadelphia on charge of contempt because he would not produce an escaped slave, brought a suit against Judge Kane for false imprisonment, which terminated by the death of the Judge. He also brought a suit against Judge Ellis Lewis, then Judge of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania for refusing his application for a habeas corpus. The court, after hearing all the plaintiffs evidence, directed a non-suit on the ground that the habeas corpus act did not apply to cases of commitments in execution of final judgments after trial, but only to warrants of arrest issued before trial. It seems to be settled that a Judge has no right to allow a writ of habeas corpus, where it appears, on the applicant's own showing, that the prisoner is legally imprisoned under the sentence or judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, as was the case with Mr. Williamson.

The Detroit Tribune notices the appearance in the streets of that city of Charles Baker who, four years ago, at the age of sixteen, was sent to the State Prison for life! He was the leader of a gang of burglars who were a terror to the owners of merchandise in Detroit, and although his sentence was approved at the time, still it was a matter of surprise that a boy only sixteen years old should have plotted and directed the schemes, securing as his accessories men old enough to be his father. This boy, Baker, having behaved himself during the four years of his imprisonment in the most exemplary manner, was pardoned by Gov. Bingham on that account and in consideration of his extreme youth.